They were already a pretty good team with Grbac, but better than the Broncos with Gannon. I went to a game against a good SF team and with Gannon at the helm they destryoed them like 44-9.

You're talking about a guy in Gannon who was better than C Kaep is at this point and a guy in Grbac who is worse than Alex Smith. You got the #1 scoring D, Andre Rison, Tony G, one of the top return games, and a tremendous O-Line that could run the ball down your throat.

I don't think that they were better than the Broncos even with Gannon, and that win over SF, while very good, wasn't quite as impressive as you were saying because the Niners were a paper tiger who beat up on a weak division.

However, the 97 Chiefs were still pretty good, and them and Denver were the two best teams in the NFL that year.

As for Gannon, the Chiefs should have kept him after the 98 season, and traded Grbac.

Actually it makes total sense. Those were probably 1a and 1b as far as GOAT offenses in the NFL and he was the biggest reason. It just shows how special of a player he was. Hope he gets a ring this year to seal his legacy.

2004 Eagles - People forget that this was basically a 13-1 team. They rested their starters in the final two weeks and that probably does somewhat hurt their legacy, unfortunately. That being said, they weren't overly dominant against a comically weak schedule and floundered against their toughest opponent during the season (a 27-3 loss to Pittsburgh)

This is what I don't get... Pittsburgh absolutely decimated them... Like it really wasn't even close. Pittsburgh held up for the entirety of the 4th quarter out of fear they might see them in the Super Bowl. Likewise, Pittsburgh beat New England the week afterwards. Philadelphia MIGHT have gone 15-1 but Pittsburgh DID go 15-1 while resting their starters.

Yet whenever these topics pop up everyone always mentions the 2004 Eagles but not the 2004 Steelers... a team that won it all the next season._________________

The one team that seems to be overlooked is the 2002 Raiders. If they had faced any other team besides the Buccaneers that season, they would have won the Superbowl. Shame that their staff were too stupid and naive to change the playbook that Jon Gruden knew at the back of his head. That team was loaded. Rich Gannon (league MVP), Tim Brown, Jerry Rice, Charles Woodson, Rod Woodson

2004 Eagles - People forget that this was basically a 13-1 team. They rested their starters in the final two weeks and that probably does somewhat hurt their legacy, unfortunately. That being said, they weren't overly dominant against a comically weak schedule and floundered against their toughest opponent during the season (a 27-3 loss to Pittsburgh)

This is what I don't get... Pittsburgh absolutely decimated them... Like it really wasn't even close. Pittsburgh held up for the entirety of the 4th quarter out of fear they might see them in the Super Bowl. Likewise, Pittsburgh beat New England the week afterwards. Philadelphia MIGHT have gone 15-1 but Pittsburgh DID go 15-1 while resting their starters.

Yet whenever these topics pop up everyone always mentions the 2004 Eagles but not the 2004 Steelers... a team that won it all the next season.

I think it's more than fair to bring up. Two things that probably lead to the Steelers being left off: one, their point differential is absurdly low for a team that went 15-1. Two, and what stands out most, is that their playoff performance was so downright uninspiring that people soured on them._________________

2004 Eagles - People forget that this was basically a 13-1 team. They rested their starters in the final two weeks and that probably does somewhat hurt their legacy, unfortunately. That being said, they weren't overly dominant against a comically weak schedule and floundered against their toughest opponent during the season (a 27-3 loss to Pittsburgh)

This is what I don't get... Pittsburgh absolutely decimated them... Like it really wasn't even close. Pittsburgh held up for the entirety of the 4th quarter out of fear they might see them in the Super Bowl. Likewise, Pittsburgh beat New England the week afterwards. Philadelphia MIGHT have gone 15-1 but Pittsburgh DID go 15-1 while resting their starters.

Yet whenever these topics pop up everyone always mentions the 2004 Eagles but not the 2004 Steelers... a team that won it all the next season.

I think it's more than fair to bring up. Two things that probably lead to the Steelers being left off: one, their point differential is absurdly low for a team that went 15-1. Two, and what stands out most, is that their playoff performance was so downright uninspiring that people soured on them.

For the record I don't think they're deserving. I just think they're more deserving than the Eagles. How often does a team go 15-1 and beat the teams with the 2nd and 3rd best records in the league that year?_________________